Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14695/KJSOS.2020.23.1.17

The Influence of Sensory Interference Arising from View-Height Differences on Visual Short-Term Memory Performance  

Ka, Yaguem (중앙대학교 사회과학대학 심리학과)
Hyun, Joo-Seok (중앙대학교 사회과학대학 심리학과)
Publication Information
Science of Emotion and Sensibility / v.23, no.1, 2020 , pp. 17-28 More about this Journal
Abstract
Lowering observers' view-height may increase the amount of occlusion across objects in a visual scene and prevent the accurate identification of the objects in the scene. Based on this possibility, memory stimuli in relation to their expected views from different heights were displayed in this study. Thereafter, visual short-term memory (VSTM) performance for the stimuli was measured. In Experiment 1, the memory stimuli were presented on a grid-background drawn according to linear perspectives, which varied across observers' three different view-heights (high, middle, and low). This allowed the participants to remember both the color and position of each memory stimulus. The results revealed that testing participants' VSTM performance for the stimuli under a different memory load of two set-sizes (3 vs. 6) demonstrated an evident drop of performance in the lowest view-height condition. In Experiment 2, the performance for six stimuli with or without the grid-background was tested. A similar pattern of performance drop in the lowest condition as in Experiment 1 was found. These results indicated that different view-heights of an observer can change the amount of occlusion across objects in the visual field, and the sensory interference driven by the occlusion may further influence VSTM performance for those objects.
Keywords
View-height; Visual Scene; Occlusion; Visual Short-term Memory; Change Detection;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. (2004). The capacity of visual short-term memory is set both by information load and by number of objects. Psychological Science, 15(2), 106-111.   DOI
2 Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.   DOI
3 Bridgeman, B., & Cook, I. (2015). Effect of eye height on estimated slopes of hills. Perception, 44(7), 755-763.   DOI
4 Clearfield, M. W., Osborne, C. N., & Mullen, M. (2008). Learning by looking: Infants' social looking behavior across the transition from crawling to walking. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 100, 297-307.   DOI
5 Fernandez-Duque, D., & Thornton, M. (2000). Change detection without awareness: Do explicit reports underestimate the representation of change in the visual system? Visual Cognition, 7(1/2/3), 323-344.   DOI
6 Flock, H. (1965). Optical texture and linear perspective as stimuli for slant perception. Psychological Review, 72(6), 505-514.   DOI
7 Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
8 Goldstein, E. B. (Ed.) (2001). Pictorial perception and art. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
9 Goldstein, E. B., & Brockmole, R. J. (2017). Sensation and Perception, 10th Edition. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
10 Han, J. -E., & Hyun, J. -S. (2011). Accurate Visual Working Memory under a Positive Emotional Expression in Face (얼굴표정의 긍정적 정서에 의한 시각작업기억 향상 효과). Science of Emotion and Sensibility, 14(4), 605-616.
11 Hyun, J. -S., & Luck, S. J. (2007). Visual working memory as the substrate for mental rotation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(1), 154-158.   DOI
12 Julesz, B. (1971). Foundation of cyclopean perception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13 Kaufman, L., Kaufman, J. H., Noble, R., Edlund, S., Bai, S., & King, T. (2006). Perceptual distance and the constancy of size and steroscopic depth. Spatial Vision, 19(5), 439-457.   DOI
14 Kretch, K. S., Franchak, J. M., & Adolph, K. E. (2014). Crawling and walking infants see the world differently. Child Development, 85(4), 1503-1518.   DOI
15 Linke, A. C., Vicente-Grabovetsky, A., Mitchell, D. J., & Cusack, R. (2011). Encoding strategy accounts for individual differences in change detection measures of VSTM. Neuropsychologia, 49(6), 1476-1486.   DOI
16 Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390, 279-281.   DOI
17 Mitroff, S. R., Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (2004). Nothing compares 2 views: change blindness can occur despite preserved access to the changed information. Perception and Psychophysics, 66, 1268-1281.   DOI
18 Pashler, H. (1988). Familiarity and visual change detection. Perception and Psychophysics, 44(4), 369-378.   DOI
19 Rensink, R. A. (2002). Change detection. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 245-277.   DOI
20 Simons, D. J., & Rensink, R. A. (2005). Change blindness: Past, present, and future. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(1), 16-20.   DOI
21 Smith, L. B., Yu, C., & Pereira, A. F. (2011). Not your mother's view: the dynamics of toddler visual experience. Developmental Science, 14(1), 9-17.   DOI
22 Twedt, E., Crawford, E., & Proffitt, D. R. (2012). Memory for target height is scaled to observer height. Memory & Cognition, 40, 339-351.   DOI
23 Vogel, E. K., Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2001). Storage of features, conjunctions and objects in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27(1), 92-114.   DOI
24 Vogel, E. K., Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2006). The time course of consolidation in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(6), 1436-1451.   DOI
25 Mon-Williams, M., & Tresilian, J. R. (1999). Some recent studies on the extraretinal contribution to distance perception. Perception, 28, 167-181.   DOI